– Stan Smith, Program Assistant, OSU Extension, Fairfield County
Considered the ‘bale of the future’
While discussing feed quality and yield concerns in this publication, sixteen years ago I suggested perhaps the “winds of change” had simply come full circle. Considering the feed and forage shortages many Ohio cattlemen are facing today, now as I look back, I wonder if we’ve really returned to some of the deep rooted beliefs that allowed our ancestors to survive. Let’s review.
While a youth in the late fifties and sixties I cut teeth on an Allis Chalmers Roto Baler. I never really asked why we had a round baler when no one else in the community did. I simply knew that when it was time to make hay, Steve and I were expected to be there.
Grandpa, dad and my uncle had built a pull type, ground driven bale elevator that conveyed those round bales, which had been dropped to the ground after they were rolled and tied, onto hay wagons for transport to the barn. The first task we learned as boys was how to maneuver the bale elevator in a fashion that got the bales onto the wagon efficiently and without needing to jump off the Allis Chalmers WD and straighten up a bale for the elevator. After all, these bales weighed 40+ pounds each, and at the age of 8, we were happy to earn a nickel an hour driving the tractor instead of wrestling those heavy weight ‘rolling pins’ across the wagon or the hay mow. I often wonder today if it wasn’t Allis Chalmers decision in 1960 to discontinue manufacturing the Roto Baler that became the precursor for shortly after seeing weight rooms being established in high school athletic facilities. But that’s a conversation for another time.
Seldom did these round bales remain in the field!
Regardless, all that said, the real point I’m trying to make is that these round bales were picked up from the field as soon as possible after being baled, and then transported to barns for storage until they were fed. I wonder what our ancestors knew then that sometimes we don’t seem to recognize now.
20+% of these baled nutrients have been lost.
As the AC Roto Baler became less popular, it was quickly replaced by larger round balers, and the concern for storing hay inside seemingly disappeared. Today, large round bales of hay appear across many rural landscapes, unfortunately deteriorating a little bit more each day they are housed outside. In fact, data collected by several Midwest Universities suggest that we are quite likely losing 20% of our baled nutrients from hay which is stored outside until it’s fed in mid or late winter.
When hay was worth $40 a ton, and a feeder calf with 4 legs and 2 good lungs was only bringing $625 a head, perhaps it wasn’t a big deal. Today, the value of hay and other feedstuffs, as well as calves, dictates the “winds of change” may be returning us to a place that Grandpa likely knew we should have never left. That is simply, “crops” were meant to be stored under roof!
As Hank Kimball may have told Oliver on Green Acres a time or two, “I’m here from the Government and I’m here to help.” The Farm Bill adopted in 2008 had a provision that remains today offering lower interest loans to build commodity storage structures that includes hay storage. These loans may be acquired for various lengths of time and are presently available through Farm Service Agency for under 4% interest. While seemingly a good deal one may still ask, “Can I afford to build a barn just to store hay?” Grandpa would have responded by asking why on earth you’d even consider storing feed outside?
As was frequently suggested during winter Extension beef cattle production meetings 16 years ago, and still today, the economics of this industry continue to evolve and change dramatically. When hay was valued at only $30 to $40 a ton, and it was abundantly available most anywhere, some might have argued they simply couldn’t afford to dedicate a building to hay storage. A quick look at the value of feed today, and the added performance realized when higher quality feedstuffs are managed and fed properly suggests it may be false economics to even consider utilizing hay as a basis for a beef cattle operation without the benefit of sheltered storage and the maintenance of hay quality it affords.
Perhaps a cost effective bale feeder when hay was valued at $10 per roll?
As we further consider how best to optimize the utilization of limited and expensive feed resources, it may be time to re-evaluate how they’re fed. While we may lose 20% of our hay crop to poor storage management as indicated in a number of University studies, additional losses of 12% or greater may be experienced as a result of poor bale ring management. Even worse, researchers suggest that unrolling round bales on the ground for feeding may result in as much as 40% loss. These feeding losses result from trampling, further weathering, manure contamination, and refusal resulting from mud or other issues which deter the animal from consuming the hay which is offered.
Frankly, I don’t recall ever seeing a steel “bale ring” highlighting the landscape as a youngster. It seems most everyone I recall was feeding hay in a bunk. Maybe they knew something back then we’ve forgotten.
Processing can increase utilization 30%.
While large round bales, even those stored in a barn, are not conducive to being fed in most bunks, once they are processed or chopped they certainly would be. Better yet, you may recall in an Ohio BEEF Cattle letter some years ago (February 6, 2008, Issue #573 at beef.osu.edu) when Francis Fluharty suggested processed hay is 30% more digestible than long stem hay is when fed as it comes directly from a typical large round bale. As we look for ways to save on the 12% feeding losses we commonly experience in bale rings, perhaps we might consider processing forages to gain an additional 30% utilization.
As we examine the reality that all feed resources – as scarce as they may be presently – have become much more valuable and will likely remain so, the traditional methods – if methods which we’ve established over only the past 50+/- years can be considered “traditional” – of handling, storing and feeding hay may be obsolete. Not only is hay a commodity which should likely be stored inside, but the manure which results from feeding it is now likely a commodity which provides valuable crop nutrients instead of burdening us as a waste product. But then, if I remember correctly, manure was our primary source of crop nutrients “back in the day” too. Perhaps, the “winds of change” have simply come full circle!
Could sheltered storage, bale processing and bunk feeding more than double the nutrients that cattle actually consume?